G.R. No. 77396 July 20, 1992
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner, vs. LEO T. VILLANUEVA, respondent.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Leo T. Villanueva was convicted by the Regional Trial Court of Virac, Catanduanes, Branch 43, of the crime of Homicide with the use of an unlicensed firearm under Presidential Decree No. 1866 and sentenced to death. The information alleged that on November 11, 1985, in Viga, Catanduanes, Villanueva, armed with an unlicensed revolver, willfully and feloniously shot Deogracias Tubianosa, Jr. in the head, causing his instantaneous death. Upon arraignment, Villanueva pleaded not guilty.
The prosecution presented witnesses whose testimonies established the following: On the afternoon of November 11, 1985, the victim, Deogracias Tubianosa, Jr., was drinking at the house of Mamerto Rojas with Horacio Aquino, Jr., Santiago Valderrama, Jr., Leo Villanueva, and others. Witness Roberto Olarte, who was waiting nearby, heard a heated argument among the group about a chicken. He saw Villanueva point a gun at Tubianosa. Olarte left to seek help and heard a gunshot. Witness Jaime Torrocha, who was also present, testified that while drinking, he heard a gunshot, looked around, and saw Villanueva holding a gun while Tubianosa was slumped on a chair with blood on his face. Dr. Loreto Rojas conducted an autopsy and confirmed the cause of death was a severe cerebral hemorrhage from a gunshot wound to the forehead. It was stipulated that Villanueva was not a licensed firearm holder. After the shooting, Villanueva left the scene, left the gun at the scene, refused to give a statement to police, and did not help the victim.
The defense presented Villanueva, who claimed the shooting was accidental. He testified that during an argument, he drew his gun to scare the victim, the victim grabbed for it, and a struggle ensued during which the gun accidentally fired.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting accused-appellant Leo T. Villanueva of Homicide with the use of an unlicensed firearm under P.D. No. 1866.

RULING

The Supreme Court AFFIRMED the conviction with modifications. The trial court’s findings of fact were upheld. The Court found the prosecution evidence, particularly the eyewitness testimonies of Olarte and Torrocha, credible and sufficient to establish Villanueva’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Their testimonies were consistent and corroborated by physical evidence. The defense of accident was rejected as not credible; the act of drawing and pointing a gun at the victim during a heated argument constituted reckless imprudence, and the claim of a struggle was unsupported. The conduct of the accused after the shooting (leaving the scene, not helping the victim, refusing to give a statement) was inconsistent with innocence. The fact that the gun was not recovered or presented did not negate the corpus delicti, as the burden to prove the firearm was licensed rested on the accused, which he failed to do. The testimony of Corporal de Leon regarding Horacio Aquino, Jr.’s statement pinpointing Villanueva was admissible not for its truth but to establish that the statement was made.
The penalty of death was commuted to reclusion perpetua in accordance with the Constitution. The civil indemnity for death was increased to P50,000.00. The rest of the trial court’s decision was affirmed.